Oshawa Port Authority meeting leaves residents dissatisfied

Oshawa This Week

The Oshawa Port Authority has once again opened itself to criticism, this time over a 'public meeting' that was both 'public' and a 'meeting' but did little to promote discussion or debate over the future of the city's portlands.

Instead, Oshawa residents invited to take part at the event on Jan. 9 were directed to tables that had paper copies of the port authority's draft land use plan and sheets of paper for participants to submit written comments.

There was no real discussion, limited interaction, and very little insight or direction provided by the port authority at the event, prompting resident Christine McLaughlin, who surely echoed the sentiments of others in attendance when she noted: "I thought I would at least be able to talk to someone."

The land use draft plan provided at the meeting seemed only to meet the minimum required standards and, in fact, didn't even make mention of the proposed ethanol plant, but notes that some of the land is designated for a port-related industrial use.

Goodness, if the port authority can't find the courage to identify a major project in the plan -- the ethanol plant -- how does it expect citizens to support it, or begin to buy in?

Oshawa Port Authority CEO Donna Taylor, to her credit, acknowledged the disappointment expressed by those who turned out and suggested a better job could be done in promoting public discussion, but that's small comfort to those who took the time to attend the meeting.

Not surprisingly, City of Oshawa officials were critical of the draft land use plan at their development services committee on Monday for its frustrating lack of detail. The staff report recommendation sees the draft plan as a starting point, and encourages the creation of a working group made up of expert representatives from the City, the port, local conservation authority and the Oshawa Public Utilities Commission. The recruitment of a citizen liaison representative, with a view to keeping the community informed of progress on the working group, would serve the purposes of inclusion.

To date, the port authority has only shown consistency in its lack of regard for the strong vein of public opposition and the demand for transparency surrounding the proposed ethanol plant. It must do a better, more responsible job of informing residents, and show more leadership in working towards its goals.

To date, its efforts have only served to stoke suspicion in the community, raise questions at City Hall, and breed cynicism over what should be an open and accessible process.
-- Oshawa This Week